日韩午夜精品视频,欧美私密网站,国产一区二区三区四区,国产主播一区二区三区四区

The World Trade Organization (WTO) recently released its statistical report on global anti-dumping cases in the second half of 2005.

The report revealed a reduction in the number of anti-dumping charges and measures and their declining role as global trade barriers.

In terms of the number of new anti-dumping investigations, 16 WTO members reported that a total of 82 cases were launched, 24 fewer than that in the same period in 2004, a fall of 23 percent.

Regarding final anti-dumping measures by WTO members, 76 fewer measures were applied by 15 WTO members in the second half of last year, 17 less than the same period in 2004, a drop of 18 percent.
 
It was the fourth consecutive year to witness a decline in the number of new anti-dumping investigations worldwide. In addition, it was the second consecutive year in which the number of final anti-dumping measures had fallen.

Despite the slow progress of the Doha Round, this indicates that the global free trade situation has nevertheless improved.

However, the easing of these trade tensions sharply contrasts with China's situation in coping with dumping charges.

Anti-dumping was the first form of trade barrier that China encountered. This took place in September 1979, when the European Community filed anti-dumping charges against Chinese exports of saccharin and alarm clocks.

Such measures have a serious impact on China's exports. Since 1995, China has become the country receiving the most anti-dumping charges.

In the second half of 2005, 33 anti-dumping cases were launched against China, an increase of 37.5 percent compared with 2004 and 3.7 times more than that against Malaysia, the second-largest recipient. Meanwhile, 22 final measures were applied against China, 2.6 times more than against the United States.

Since it is the only country in the world that can make all manufactured goods with competitive costs, a wide range of Chinese products have fallen foul of anti-dumping charges.

This trend continues and worsens despite changes to China's export commodity structure. Whatever industries develop fast in China risk falling victim to dumping charges.

In the second half of 2005, for example, the products that were the most frequent subject of reported new investigations were chemicals (17), base metals (15) and plastics (12). All are sectors in China which are either enjoying rapid growth or have a competitive advantage.

Developing countries play a dual role in China's trade disputes.

On the one hand, they are China's partners in promoting a new international economic order to replace the current one, which favors developed countries.

But, despite having much in common, the interests of some developing countries sometimes conflict with China's.

Compared with technology- and competition policy-based trade barriers, anti-dumping measures are a more convenient weapon to wield. Therefore, as developed countries have increasingly adopted anti-dumping strategies, developing economies are also following suit.

Among the 104 anti-dumping cases launched in the first half of 2002, 63 were launched by developing countries. India, Argentina and Mexico took first, third and fifth place.

In the second half of 2005, developing countries continued to raise anti-dumping charges, launching 67 percent of world's anti-dumping cases and applying 64 percent of global anti-dumping final measures.

To make matters worse, compared with developed economies, some developing nations are more willful in raising dumping charges against China and adopt stricter measures, further exacerbating the protectionist risks China faces.

In the foreseeable future, anti-dumping measures will remain the major threat facing China's exporters. And the dual role of developing countries in the process has complicated the situation.

China has made great headway in improving its trade remedy system within the WTO legal framework.

As the WTO report shows, among members reporting new cases from July to December 2005, the highest number was China, with 13 initiations, followed by Argentina and India, which each opened 11 cases.

China is fully entitled to use legal weapons allowed by WTO rules to protect its legitimate trade rights. But that does not mean we can use those rules to protect inefficient enterprises.

These measures are not aimed at blocking imports, but instead are designed to help Chinese exporters gain a level playing field in the international trade arena.

(China Daily May 25, 2006)